HDR lovers, what is your views?

[zoossh]

not here to spark conflicts as we all know it may - about real, unreal, and what is good and bad, and who decides that etc. i have nothing against HDR just that i dun really do it. i saw a thread that shows another HDR work and it gets me thinking about again.

i noticed that a number of us goes specifically for HDR software that specifically give it a signature look. interest is specifically directed to tones and hues with the freedom of altering/redistributing it at one's wish, much further than conventional methods. subject is not usually limited to any genre and attention is given mostly to the end effect instead.

can i ask from the HDR lovers... what is it that attracts you to that effect? is it with the perfection of a difficult technique... or is it the freedom to try out different effects... or something else?

would it be a good idea to ask the moderators if there could be a subforum portion that combines HDR galleries with HDR discussion so that afficiados can gather together rather than scattered in different subforums?

 

[night86mare]

do you want me to write out my views on hdr again? lol.

1) i go for hdr because the camera cannot handle the dynamic range of the scene
2) i go for hdr because it is closer to what the eye sees, rather than what the camera sees
3) the eye does not see haloing, does not see uneven lighting, etc

so i go for natural looking, realistic hdrs.

i understand that the alternative may appeal to a certain crowd, but i dislike it immensely, because most of the time, the effect is used as a gimmick. it is just like making a model don a dustbin on her head. some may like it, but if the image is to withstand any test of time, more than gimmicks is required.

 

[zoossh]

i know your views, but wanted to hear from the others and their personal reasons.

 

[chisiang]

i know your views, but wanted to hear from the others and their personal reasons.

:bsmilie: :sweatsm:

 

[night86mare]

i know your views, but wanted to hear from the others and their personal reasons.

they seem more interested in feeling offended about my views.

some day, maybe people will see that it's never personal.

 

[zoossh]

they seem more interested in feeling offended about my views.

some day, maybe people will see that it's never personal.

maybe give them a voice in this thread. ... and a subforum to play with it.

 

[night86mare]

maybe give them a voice in this thread. ... and a subforum to play with it.

a voice is nothing if people do not want to use it.

what is a forum for? for exchanging of views, for cordial arguments.

of course none of that can be done if parties cannot see the argument beyond a sense of self-worth.

what people think about your pictures never define what they think of you. get beyond it!

 

[archlover]

i tried HDR before and experimenting with it...
i still think it's a good tool to keep a detail that lost in our normal photo because of low dynamic range,
but i just don't like to see it as a tool to make a so-so photo to be some "omg the effect is so cool" kind of photo.. ( i think it's fake, not cool )
and i hate all those funny color that comes out of nowhere in some hdr photos...
but it depends, because as for me, i like the photos the way it is, a photo is a photo... but if you see photo as a "graphic design products" maybe it is looks cool...
nyway.. i'm too lazy to try hdr again now.. and i'm learn to accept the fact that sometimes the washed out white or too dark black also can be nice
sorry if anybody got offended with my opinion cheers

 

[Sion]

they seem more interested in feeling offended about my views.

 

[schon]

i'm not a hdr lover, but imo like anything else, when done tastefully, is awesome.

 

[Sion]

HDR is a man's answer to his quest for excellence in photography and recognition in photo forums. :bsmilie:

 

[hazmee]

HDR is gimmicky and a waste of time. Those who are still at it are just lying to themselves. The only reason why some still struggle at it is simply because they think HDR can save a lousy taken shoot. Some don't even bother to learn the basics. There comes a day when everyone will get sick of it and soon forget it existed.

 

[jopel]

There comes a day when everyone will get sick of it and soon forget it existed.

so serious ah.

 

[hope107fm]

i'm not a hdr lover, but imo like anything else, when done tastefully, is awesome.

Agreed. Have seen some HDR photos and they are great. At least it's a tool available when you want it, so I don't think it should be disparaged.

 

[lastboltnut]

Personally I love HDR when I need to shoot HD scene. I don't think HDR will be phased out of photography. May be the term HDR will be disappeared when all camera can shoot at higher than present DR (closer to human eye).

My view on HDR:

Realistic Type for most shots, but its very difficult to achieve it as I may be carried away during processing...so now I would usually save the work and re-look at it after a few days, it will be more subjective. Some of my realistic (or so I thought) HDR:

However, since I know how surreal/comical HDR effect can be if its abused, I really love to make use of these special effects when I think my photos need such effects. I love to see things on both sides of a coin, so I am in love with surreal and comical HDR too:

Last but not least, I would like to highlight that when I mention HDR, I am talking about >16bit of data. My camera RAW is not capable of achieving that, so all my samples are multiple shots and not a single RAW Tone Mapped image.

Again, like what brother night86mare mentioned, its all about personal style of each "photograher" and there is no right or wrong, so differences in view do not mean its a personal insult. Just like Pavarotti did not despise Micheal Jackson nor otherwise, just that each has their own fan and niche in the market. : )

 

[sammy888]

There comes a day when everyone will get sick of it and soon forget it existed.

The same can be said that it will be done so often we just take it as another option without even thinking about it like many other techniques we have now taken it for granted so much we just forget all about them.

 

[ArchRival]

HDR to me means writing a program to turn a perfectly useable photo like this

into a patchy monstrosity like this

Still working on it, but when i'm done i will release the code free to every siao ginna with camera, and the world will drown in toxic HDR.

:bsmilie::bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[MRSAMO]

I think HDR effects create a nice picture, but then the magic of the photo is no longer there.

In other words, do you shoot photos to be a good photographer or a good photoshopper?

 

[ahbian]

I don't love/hate a photo just because its done the HDR way, but simply because it looks nice/not nice.

Perhaps the problem is that for every well done HDR, there are many others who have jumped onto the idea and overdid it.

Of course, the idea of "well done" and "overdone" is subjective, but we would be kidding ourselves if we feel that photography is anything but subjective.

This argument can be extended to arguments like film vs digital, post processing vs no processing. I'm for all styles, so long as it looks good.

 

[Pablo]

I have seen some beautiful HDR photo's and admire the art involved in creating them....

Of them, the first 2 here for example by Lastboltnut :thumbsup:

It is an art used with photography.

Infrared photography is an art, Black and White photography is an art.

To anyone that shoots with film, develops it them-self and does not alter it in any way from the original shot; I tip my hat to you :thumbsup:

Art:

Compare Leonardo da Vinci's work on the human face and Picasso's....

People will pay millions for both.

Who say's what form of art is right. Only our "very own brain" linked to "our" eyes